Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii Jenifer Neils Case Western Reserve University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Etruscan Studies Journal of the Etruscan Foundation Volume 11 Article 2 2008 Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii Jenifer Neils Case Western Reserve University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/etruscan_studies Recommended Citation Neils, Jenifer (2008) "Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii," Etruscan Studies: Vol. 11 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/etruscan_studies/vol11/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Etruscan Studies by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii by Jenifer Neils ABSTRACT The most famous examples of Etruscan architectural sculptures are those from the Portonaccio sanctuary at Veii of ca. 510 B.C. The surviving over life-size terracotta akroteria include Apollo (to whom the temple was originally thought to be dedicated), Herakles, Hermes, and a female figure holding a child identified as Leto with her son Apollo. Given the rarity of Apollo as a child in classical art and the implausibility of his appearing twice on a building dedicated to Minerva, a new interpretation is here proposed for this group as Niobe with her youngest child. If the Veii Apollo, striding along with his bow, is correctly interpreted as reacting to Herakles’ clubbing of the Kerynian hind, then one can visualize his sister in a similar pose chasing Niobe and her last surviving child, as depicted on a slightly later Attic red-figure vase. This subject in which Niobe is punished for her impiety is more in keeping with other themes of Etruscan architectural sculp - ture, such as the Pyrgi pedimental group, which are deliberately normative. eProduced in every handbook of Etruscan art, the Portonaccio temPle of Veii with its rooftoP terracotta sculPtures is one of the best known architectural R monuments of ancient Etruria .1 All students of art history recognize the grouP of the striding god APollo/APlu, the deity to whom the temPle was originally believed to be dedicated, battling the Greek hero Herakles/Hercle over the Kerynian hind. Otto Brendel called it “one of the most distinguished examPles Preserved of all Etruscan sculP - ture.” 2 Equally often illustrated is the head of the god Hermes/Turms , who is Posed as a bystander behind the figure of Herakles in most reconstructions of the roof . For Pur - Poses of symmetry a Putative Artemis/Artume is often reconstructed behind her broth - er APollo. 3 However, there were more life-size terracotta figures, as well as akroteria – 35 – ––––--–––––––––––––––– Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii ––––––––-––––––––––––– figure 1 and figure 2 – Woman fleeing with child, front and back. Terracotta akroterion from Portonaccio Temple at Veii, ca. 510 B.C. Rome, Villa Giulia. Photos: Hirmer – 36 – ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Jenifer Neils ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Pedestals, found in the excavations at the Portonaccio sanctuary, and few attemPts have been made to arrange these on the temPle building. A case in Point is the subject of this PaPer, the life-size sculPture of a draPed woman carrying a child at her left shoulder (Figs. 1-2 ). I here question the traditional identification of this figure and Posit an alternative that has greater affinity with the sculPtural Programs of other Etruscan temPles . The body of the female figure and her child were discovered in some 250 Pieces by Massimo Pallottino in 1938 – twenty-two years after the APollo, Herakles , and head of Hermes. 4 The fragments lay just to the north of the sanctuary’s later altar. 5 The head was not found until 1944 and while it does not actually join the body, its relevance to the stat - ue seems assured on the basis of fabric and coloring . In its restored state the statue meas - ures 1.66 m, or just slightly shorter than the statue of APollo (1.75 m). Like APollo she is Posed in an extremely wide stride , but is moving to her left or the viewer’s right . She is richly clad in a light-colored belted chiton contrasting with a dark symmetrical mantle. Her hair is long and flowing , and her head is crowned with a diadem. While her left arm is missing, with her right she braces the leg of a young child, Preserved from the waist down, who is Perched at her left shoulder. The child is Presumably male on account of his darker skin color; he wears a short tunic, the folds of which are visible along his left thigh. In his Publication of the statue in 1950 Pallottino identified the kourotroPhic female as the goddess Leto/Latona holding the infant APollo/APlu in her arms, and this identification has been generally accePted in much of the scholarly literature. 6 Assuming another two-figured narrative grouP like the Herakles and APollo, he interPreted this sec - ond grouP as baby APollo shooting the snake Python at DelPhi . In his reconstruction (Fig. 3) he has somewhat altered the direction of Leto’s gaze, shifting it farther to the right. His chief comParandum for this mythical scene was the name-vase of the Leto Painter, a red-figure lekythos in Berlin of ca. 470 B.C. that shows Leto carrying the nude, baby archer APollo aiming his bow to the right. 7 As evidence for the Python Pallottino cited a black-figure lekythos of simi - lar date in Paris that shows the serPent coiling near an altar figure 3 – Leto, Apollo and the Python. Reconstruction by and cave, with another woman Pallottino of the ridge-pole of the Portonaccio Temple at Veii. and Palm tree intervening Drawing after ArchCl 2, 1950, pl. 38, 3. – 37 – ––––--–––––––––––––––– Niobe (?) on the Portonaccio Temple at Veii ––––––––-––––––––––––– figure 4 – Leto with baby Apollo. Attic black-figure lekythos ca. 470 B.C. Paris, Cabinet des Médailles 306. Photo after CVA Bib. Nat. 2, pl. 86.2.6-8. between the snake and Leto (Fig. 4 ). 8 To suPPort his interPretation Pallottino ProPosed that a very small terracotta fragment of a Possible snake could be the Python. A mere six centimeters in diameter, this fragment is Problematic as Part of a life-size akroterion intended to be visible from far below .9 Besides the diminutive snake, there are numerous Problems with these Attic vase-Painting comParanda. First, Leto is shown standing still, not moving as in the Veii statue. Second , APollo is nude , and finally, both figures look to the right. Closer to the Veii sculPture in Pose is the Leto on a lost APulian amPhora once in the Hamilton col - lection (Fig. 5 ). 10 Here she is actually running and looking back at the snake curled in its cave, but she holds two half-draPed children, neither of whom is shooting a bow. More imPortantly both black-figure lekythoi were found in Attica, and in the Etruscan sPhere the ePisode is rePresented quite differently. A charming fifth-century mirror from Cerveteri shows the divine twins as toddlers together battling the large snake while their mother looks calmly on (Fig. 6 ). 11 In this instance the nude children are on the ground and PerhaPs not surPrisingly in Etruscan art, Artemis is leading the charge. In none of these illustrations of the Python myth does the child APollo aPPear endangered; he is after all a god and does not need his mother’s Protection. At the time Pallottino Published his interPretation, it was generally accePted that the Portonaccio temPle was dedicated to APollo in sPite of the fact that at least three inscribed sixth-century bucchero sherds bear the name of Menrva/Minerva .12 More recently scholars like Banti have suggested a triad of divinities, namely Menrva, Artume and Turan, while Torelli claims a joint oracular cult of DelPhic APollo and Menrva. 13 However, the inscriPtional evi - dence, as well as the ambiguity regarding the number of cellas (one with two alae, or three), clearly demonstrate that Menrva was the original cult figure at the Portonaccio sanctuary. Therefore, one might legitimately question the existence of two images of APollo on a temPle dedicated to another deity. And in fact Otto Brendel did so in 1978: “For the striding woman who tenderly bears a child in her arms no satisfactory exPlanation has yet been forthcoming. – 38 – ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Jenifer Neils ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Since the infant cannot be the god APollo, the suggestion to name its guardian Latona, APollo’s mother, carries little conviction.” Nonetheless Pallottino’s aPPellation has stuck, and most Publications still label the figure Latona/Leto. Brendel went on to suggest that the woman may simPly be an un-named kourotroPhoic figure, not unlike some of the later votives found in the sanctuary. 14 A drawback to this identification is the fact that the other figures on the roof are taking Part in narratives, whereas a kourotroPhos, like the Mater Matuta from Chianciano , is usually a single image with no associated action. 15 Other suggestions for the identity of this mother and child have not been lack - ing. One Posited by Silvio Ferri is Creusa with her son Ascanius (or if a deity is Preferred, APhrodite with her grandson) escaPing Troy, a PoPular theme in Italy. 16 In classical art there are numerous images of women holding a child thus, and almost always it is mor - tal and in Peril for its life. 17 ExamPles from Athenian vase Painting include Danae with baby Perseus as they are about to be set adrift in a box ; a nurse holding Alkmaion, the son of AmPhiaraos, as the latter deParts for war and his demise at Thebes ; Andromache clutching Astyanax who will eventually be thrown from the walls of Troy ; and Niobe with her youngest child, the last to be slain by the divine twins .